Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Virgin's Unaccompanied Minor Policy Under Fire  
User currently offlinepeh From Australia, joined Nov 2006, 340 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13629 times:

A number of Australian airlines, including Virgin, have implemented a policy that prevents male passengers from being seated next to unaccompanied minors.

This all came to light earlier this week when a Virgin customer, who was asked to move away from two unaccompanied minors, objected to the insinuation that he might be a danger to children simply because he was male.

http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-...to-think-again-20120810-23y7q.html

It hardly seems fair to paint all men with the same brush.

Do we agree? What would be a better policy?

[Edited 2012-08-10 01:34:55]


Flown: ATR72, DASH 8, 737, 747, 767, 777, A300, A320, A321, A330, A340, MD80
111 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesmi0006 From Australia, joined Jan 2008, 1489 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13514 times:

This is not unique to Virgin, Qantas have the same policy.

As does every other airline I have interacted with; QR, EK, PR, and CZ. Some even stipulate that ground-staff escorting the UMs to and from their families should if possible (depending on staffing) be female as well.

I have no doubt that whilst it is a generalisation this rule came about as a child was molested by a male passenger... and the airline was sued for negligence. I doubt if airlines actually feel male passengers are a threat its just a way of protecting themselves.

From a side note and from casual and anecdotal observations woman are much better at interacting with children then men are - again generally from my personal observations.


User currently offlinezkokq From Australia, joined Mar 2012, 464 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13434 times:

Surely the airlines have the capability for not seating males next to minors with some sort of query through the database when they book tickets and such. I agree with the policy (in the sense of protecting the kids and the male, because I dont want to be accused or something I didnt do). I just dont agree with how it is handled.

User currently offlinecygnuschicago From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13413 times:

I'm quite happy with a policy to not be seated next to an UM. Afterall, it is probably just as much for my protection from some poorly raised kid.

However, since I pick my seats well in advance, if I was already on the plane, and then the flight attendant asked me to move, I'd kick up a fuss.



If you cannot do the math, your opinion means squat!
User currently offlinetwa@fra From China, joined Nov 2000, 145 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 13375 times:

As per my knowledge the most ““attacks”” had been by male passengers, as this policy simple reduce the risk for kids… I’m fine with it.
But I must admit the 1st time I’ve heard of similar rules at other airlines (IIRC AF) it felt weird simply because of my gender being assigned to that “risk” group and it must be even more strange being asked to move, but as mention above, if that general rules helps, I’m fine with it.


User currently offlineflyboy_se From Qatar, joined Feb 2000, 781 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 13247 times:

I a pretty sure most airlines have this policy.
The UM s are always pre seated , if flight is not full then no one is sitting next to them, if not, a female passenger is seated next to the UM.
However this is only possible if the UM is pre booked. You would be surprised how many irresponsible parents there are out there. Many times showing up just before flight closure not having booked the UM assistance. In cases like these, then some seat shuffling happens, and passengers are asked to move.



Let´s fly away
User currently offlinecipango From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 13199 times:

Personally I can see how this could turn nasty leaving the FA's in a very uncomfortable position. But its all to do with how its handled.

If I was asked to move because I'm male and I was seated next to an unaccompanied minor I would definitely kick up a fuss. But if it was put differently to me, it might be different.



Next Flights: DUB-BHX-DUB, DUB-BHX-DUB, DUB-LIS-DUB.
User currently offlinesmi0006 From Australia, joined Jan 2008, 1489 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 13167 times:

Quoting zkokq (Reply 2):
Surely the airlines have the capability for not seating males next to minors with some sort of query through the database when they book tickets and such. I agree with the policy (in the sense of protecting the kids and the male, because I dont want to be accused or something I didnt do). I just dont agree with how it is handled.

This is the case. The only time that I have ever seen this occur is due to an accidental seat change by which the passengers have their seats swapped post check-in for a variety of factors and the staff member actioning the seat change does not look at who has been seated around them. Generally Female passengers seat next to UMs are commented not to be moved for this reason. But accidents do happen.

According to most airline procedures in priority UM should be seated next to the following people:

1. Other UMs
2. Female crew on duty travel in uniform.
3. Female airline staff on duty travel out of uniform
4. Female passengers

UMs should be seated in the last row of the aircraft near a galley.


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2885 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 13113 times:

Mary Kay Letourneau, is a female, she has spent time in prison for having sex with a male student, it's not just men that commit Most times in human trafficking for sex, the people that those kids first trust is a woman who lures them into a situation that they are forced to be prostitutes, a very real crime that happens everyday in this country, woman can be just as awful to a child as a man can. I understand if they gave UM's their own row of seats, putting 1-3 UM's together where one flight attendant can at least watch them when making the usual rounds. Do problems with male passengers and UM's happen at all, or with any kind of regularity? One is too many, and I recognize it is mostly males that offend, but it's a big reaction unless this is a real problem, right?


Rule number One, NEVER underestimate the other guys greed
User currently offlinebastew From Australia, joined Sep 2006, 1023 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 13046 times:

We have had the same policy at BA for years now.

User currently offlinetayser From Australia, joined Mar 2008, 1123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 13007 times:

The Australian Sex discrimination commissioner / Australian Human Rights commission should scrutinise ALL Australian airline policies in this area - the policy is tantamount to labelling all males as kiddie-fiddlers - this is:

1) repugnant,
2) ignorant of the fact that not every paedophile has male genitalia,
3) absolutely atrocious, and
4) 100% sexist.


User currently offlineSInGAPORE_AIR From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13735 posts, RR: 19
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12998 times:

BA came under fire for this in 2010: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10182869


Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlinetayser From Australia, joined Mar 2008, 1123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12983 times:

oh and 5) a nanny state gone completely mad.

[Edited 2012-08-10 03:50:17]

User currently offlineStickShaker From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 722 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12960 times:

I think such policies are a sign of political correctness gone mad - something not restricted to airlines. Just how often are airlines confronted with litigation due to an UM being abused ?
It has taken decades to eradicate/improve discrimination against women in the workplace and many other areas of society and yet we are have this parnoia that all men are potential child molesters and must be treated as such. Is it going to be illegal for men to walk past schools and kindergardens one day. Enough is enough - I hope this incident returns some common sense to the fold.


Regards,
StickShaker


User currently offlinetayser From Australia, joined Mar 2008, 1123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12930 times:

Hooray for common sense.......... Virgin are now reviewing the policy:

http://www.theage.com.au/travel/trav...to-think-again-20120810-23y7q.html


User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5609 posts, RR: 45
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 12846 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It is more than repugnant it is unfounded.

As a regular train commuter, sometimes I move train carriages because of loud and uncontrollable children(ironically often with their parents) I would prefer to not be seated next to same.
Having said that, having to move because airline "profiling" has decided I am a threat to children is abhorrent in the extreme... try similar profiling on a bearded gentleman in a thobe or shalwar kameez and see how ballistic the civil liberties folk and media go!

Not much documentary evidence of minors being assaulted on aircraft in this country, more coverage of teacher/student issues and these cases are more often than not female teachers and male students yet this "kiddie fiddler" mind set has driven males out of many roles where they once made great contributions.

I once did some contract work in schools... never in a situation where I would be with students without a teacher present, I had to fill out forms for police checks to confirm that I was not a sex offender... females of similar background to me did not have to submit.

If someone can explain this to me I am all ears...

I wonder if those organisations with a true and meaningful Equal Opportunity policy(and culture) let Virgin know they were rethinking their travel policy..

Quoting tayser (Reply 14):
Hooray for common sense.......... Virgin are now reviewing the policy:

That is not yet a victory for common sense, the wording from Virgin looks to me more like a media release to defuse the bad press and get the issue out of the headlines rather than do anything meaningful.

A well advised and decisive management could change the policy within hours.. a "review" is a bureaucrat's way of saying file it away.

[Edited 2012-08-10 04:30:41]


If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinebastew From Australia, joined Sep 2006, 1023 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 12797 times:

I agree with all of the above. A needless policy.

Alas, we had the same uproar at BA when it was first publicised. Funny thing is, the policy had ALWAYS been in place. It's just that when the media got wind of it that it exploded.

Suffice to say, the policy remains in place. And thats saying something in a country like the UK where we can't even deport an illegal immigrant rapist/murderer to their home country because it is 'against their human rights'.

BA introduced their policy regarding the seating of UM's due to 1) The request of many parents and 2) So they can be seen as doing all they can under their 'duty of care' to protect the childs wellbeing during the flight. Should an allegation be made BA is in the best position to protect itself in a court if it can show it followed this seating policy.

BTW, I am not advocating or agreeing with points one or two above! Just being the messenger  Smile

[Edited 2012-08-10 04:38:59]

User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12325 posts, RR: 35
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 12796 times:

I think the intention here is purely CYA; they have made a calculation that although they might get ticked off by equal opportunities and anti-discrimination quangos, it's a lot better than getting sued.

Were I in that position, I wouldn't see a point in kicking up a fuss, because you'd probably end up being escorted off the plane, probably getting a police caution; I would however ask to be seated in another window seat.

Unfortunately, there's not a lot else you can do.


User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5609 posts, RR: 45
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 12745 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kaitak (Reply 17):
Unfortunately, there's not a lot else you can do.

Yes there is .. not accept blindly criminally discriminatory policy.



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinebastew From Australia, joined Sep 2006, 1023 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 12711 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 17):
Unfortunately, there's not a lot else you can do.

Or we may even see the day where airlines just stop offering a UM service.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16694 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 12683 times:

Quoting cygnuschicago (Reply 3):
I'm quite happy with a policy to not be seated next to an UM.

Perfectly fine with this policy, protecting children should be paramount over everything else, in fact I think it should be policy of all airlines.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5609 posts, RR: 45
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 12615 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting STT757 (Reply 20):
protecting children should be paramount over everything else,

Absolutely, but sending a message that all men are perverted child molesters is NOT protecting children.

We, in the West have created a mindset that all men are evil and children should be scared of them.

That needs to change and it needs to change now!!!

Don't get me wrong, I think sex offenders and child molesters should be locked up .. forever(in the general prison population so the "honourable" criminals" can take care of them)



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16694 posts, RR: 51
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 12567 times:

Quoting stealthz (Reply 21):
Absolutely, but sending a message that all men are perverted child molesters is NOT protecting children.

We, in the West have created a mindset that all men are evil and children should be scared of them.

All men are not predators, but are all predators men?



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineDLD9S From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 256 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 12532 times:

What happens if the male passenger pre-paid his seat assignment for say a window at the bulkhead and gets moved to a middle in the back... Is it like checked bag fees and lost bags? No refunds even if the service is not provided?


717 727 737 747 757 767 777 DC9 DC10 M80 M90 M11 L10 AB6 333 340 319 320 321 ARJ CRJ EM2 EMJ SF3 146 100 BE1...
User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1466 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 12519 times:

Quoting tayser (Reply 10):
The Australian Sex discrimination commissioner / Australian Human Rights commission should scrutinise ALL Australian airline policies in this area - the policy is tantamount to labelling all males as kiddie-fiddlers - this is:

1) repugnant,
2) ignorant of the fact that not every paedophile has male genitalia,
3) absolutely atrocious, and
4) 100% sexist.

Well, I had to ship a child UM from Europe to Australia and I requested that SQ not sit her next to a male adult, they were quite happy to do so, and did so.

I would hope that airlines would plan seating in advance so as not to create situations where male PAX were moved away from children but I wouldn't be too offended if I was asked to move as long as I got an equivalent seat.

Adults try to protect their children from imagined as well as real threats, you have to make allowances for this and get off of your high horse.



BV
25 stealthz : I have seen some BS on this site in the 7 or so years I have been a member and that is without doubt the most flagrantly so I have seen. The Criminal
26 stealthz : No, you have to be honest enough to admit your child is at far more risk of abuse from someone in your family or a close friend and not someone in a
27 VHHYI : Wasn't it changed after the an affected pax sued and won? Sounds like a reasonable approach to me.. Pity Virgin got the short stick from the media, a
28 kgaiflyer : Three ideas: (1)-Since the vast majority of business travelers are men, the airlines seem to have invented yet another way to drive away clients and d
29 tayser : This.
30 Post contains images StickShaker : They can also get sued for that discrimination and that could occur many times more often than being sued for an UM being abused. If anyone is going
31 OB1504 : If the parent initiates the request, that's fine, but this shouldn't be the standard airline policy. I wouldn't move out of a window or aisle seat (es
32 AA94 : I agree with the sentiment that children need to be protected, but the problem is that it's ignorant to narrow the "offenders" category to only inclu
33 Dizzy777 : that was QF's policy last time i checked too
34 silentbob : ;well, then you will get the "if it will prevent even one future attack it is worth the hassle" argument from those in favor. In the US at least, it'
35 Markam : I don't know whether it is so clear that this is fine. Does the fact that parents believe in gender discrimination justify the airline implementing i
36 BoeingVista : What? I find your post highly offensive, you don't know me yet you make a ridiculous assumption about what I know and what I believe; you need to pul
37 ikramerica : While there are plenty of examples of women having sex with minors, they tend to be cases where the wacko women claim to be "in love" with the kid, t
38 PHX787 : The negligence is not sitting the molester next to the child, but simply the F/A not doing anything while the molestation occurred. Or the people aro
39 AeroWesty : Bingo. I once asked for AA to reassign the seating of a 14/15-year old male seated next to me to another seat in First—turns out he was the son of
40 Post contains images readytotaxi : What we need is more passenger profiling. Everyone know what a terrorist looks like, right, we need to apply this to the “kiddie fiddler” too. He
41 JONC777 : not too long ago an older lady gave a um sitting next to her drugs for his headache. . . . this happened at LAS. . .they were prescription drugs also!
42 bastew : The policy was reviewed and some tweaks were made. But the seating policy remains: UM's will not be sat next to male adult passengers travelling alon
43 mayor : Nope
44 ajd1992 : I personally would refuse to move. If they think I'm a paedophile then that is their business - I cannot stop people from thinking what they like. How
45 OzarkD9S : If they moved me to a First Class window seat I would gladly move away from any child, UM or not. Seriously, I've been asked to move once, very discr
46 ajd1992 : It's not even that though, it's the principle of they think because I've got wedding tackle i'm automatically a child abuser. It's on exactly the sam
47 MD-90 : Frankly I wouldn't've bothered but to each his own.
48 gingersnap : No of course not. There was an extensively covered paedophile case that happened in the UK not so long ago. The main perpetrators were female working
49 OzarkD9S : I'm hardly suggesting it's not stereotyping. But we have several different perspectives going on at once: 1) The responsibility of the airline 2) The
50 peh : American prisons are populated with a disproportionate number of black people. By applying Virgin's logic, it would be perfectly acceptable for a sec
51 peh : Even if refusal results n you being kicked off the aircraft for not cooperating with staff? You know this is how this case could have ended.
52 Post contains links ScottishDavie : Stealthz could probably have phrased his post more tactfully but having spent 32 years as a criminal prosecutor I can assure you that the statistics
53 DocLightning : Wasn't there a case where a passenger was actually bumped for this reason? Asked to leave the aircraft because, for some reason, the passenger could n
54 spudsmac : That's exactly how all the males in the thread feel about being assumed to be a child molester. You're upset about being told your child is at a high
55 AustinAllison : This is a violation of basic human rights.
56 ASFlyer : So do they also take steps to be sure that the children are never in the care of a male Flight Attendant, Customer Service Agent or other airline empl
57 aerorobnz : 1)Legally the UMNR is under the airline's guardianship, and that makes them more valuable and high priority than anyone else onboard. That is the real
58 tonystan : Hahahaha, couldnt agree more! There are a disgusting amount of "clever" and manipulative kids out there that given a break from their folks for any l
59 Mir : Except it's not about protecting children, it's about protecting the passenger. We all know there are some very unscrupulous people out there, and th
60 AeroWesty : It's called "managing risk."
61 Post contains images ajd1992 : Indeed - see my Vanessa George reference in post 44. The perspectives of each party is whatever they deem to be important which I completely understa
62 777ER : Well I found your post highly offensive as your basically saying all males are a risk to children! I'm sure many other males would also find your pos
63 LV : This happened to me on an AA flight once, but the FA bumped me up to first since I had to move for the kid. Perfectly fine with me because I am not a
64 Mir : And that's the right thing to do. No problem with being upgraded for any reason. -Mir
65 AeroWesty : I view unaccompanied minors as a risk to adult males. There are a lot of crazy people out there, and you never know when someone is going to make an
66 strangr : I would too! I was thinking as a side note. as much as it is, if the Adult male was sitting next to kids for 18 hours of the flight he would probably
67 PHX787 : I agree but I'd like you to explain how. Yeah I've heard the same (I think an AA flight?) but apparently he was given a bunch of free stuff and a fre
68 kgaiflyer : Didn't you know? It already happens all the time.
69 AustinAllison : It is the whole 'guilty until proven innocent' argument. By forcibly removing males (and only males) they are suggesting that all men (and no women)
70 OB1504 : Ultimately, the passenger is the one funding the operations of the airline, and the airline should be willing to accommodate requests when feasible.
71 Post contains images tymnbalewne : The BA policy has been in effect for decades! When I joined BA (again, decades ago!) I was told that the policy wasn't originally to protect children
72 PROSA : According to most airline procedures in priority UM should be seated next to the following people: 1. Other UMs So you have, let's say, a 7-year-old g
73 PROSA : This was always in the back of my mind as a CSA. Whenever a call came in for an unaccompanied minor that needed an escort, I would always try to pass
74 ikramerica : No matter where one stands on the merit of the rule, the action should not be to move the adult male, but to move the child. Period. There is no real
75 garpd : So if the parents requested their children not be sat next to anyone of a certain creed or religion, would that be fine also? And don't say "that's n
76 Post contains images OB1504 : I never worked with UMs, so I can't answer that. I would always ask someone else to do it regardless of the UM's age or gender. Plus, there was a lot
77 DocLightning : Very good point. Yes, and for decades women couldn't vote and slavery was legal. "That's how we've always done it" is not a valid defense for a polic
78 PROSA : The easy solution to this issue is to seat UMs ONE THEIR OWN within arms length of an FA. If that means an entire rank of 3 seats are empty save for t
79 AustinAllison : It is a very stereotypical rule that paints all men in same rule, which is a violation of basic human rights. Just like painting all gay men as pedop
80 art : That is precisely the insinuation. Moving male passengers seated next to unaccompanied minors just helps reinforce the distorted risk perception from
81 Post contains images hOmsaR : Was he seated next to a UM?
82 art : I don't think I'd feel like talking to anyone either if I was being extradited!
83 ABpositive : I can see the policy's merits, but it is the problem of how it should be implemented. My understanding is that the VA flight attendant said publicly t
84 ANPlatinum : No one has considered the issue from the children’s perspective. The poor dears have probably had little contact with adult males. They have been ra
85 Quokkas : Could but unlikely. In Australia both Commonwealth (Federal) and State anti-discrimination legislation follow a similar pattern. If there is a compla
86 AeroWesty : As an adult I do make that decision. Comprende?
87 ikramerica : No, the man should never have been asked to move, public, semi-public, private doesn't matter. The man did nothing wrong and in NO context should it
88 Post contains images PHX787 : He did not look American, but he sure as heck wasn't Japanese. Maybe a mobster who was in Macao (I was going through some news sources that speculate
89 Post contains links StickShaker : I think it would not only be likely but also successful. I would love to see this VB case tested in court - it just reeks of hypocracy. There have be
90 Quokkas : If the matter went before court it might be successful. We have no way of knowing in advance. I am not arguing that the case has no merits, nor am I
91 aerorobnz : The child is put into a particular seat for a particular reason. That is to say, the back of economy near the galley. They need to be supervised by t
92 Post contains links StickShaker : An article in the Smh here. Ben Sandiland's comments here. ...... A former federal sex discrimination commissioner, Susan Halliday, said a policy form
93 Post contains links Quokkas : Interestingly enough the Australian ServicesUnion has been in discussion with QF over the very issue of Unaccompanied Minors. http://www.asu.asn.au/me
94 tymnbalewne : Dude...don't harsh my mellow! If you reread what I wrote I was only giving an historical context of the rule.
95 Post contains images mandala499 : So, male pax considered dangerous / a risk for UM pax? Well, just the other day, there was in the news somewhere of a woman ending up raping a 15 year
96 CXfirst : Me (male) and my sister were travelling as UM with SQ in a 3-3-3 config. I was planning on sitting in the window seat (sister uninterested), and was f
97 zkokq : Protecting the child I am fine with, but why not offer the protection of the male passanger as part of the service?
98 Speedbird2155 : The BA policy has indeed been amended and it no longer explicitly states that adult males may not be seated next to UMs. Airport teams now have a set
99 IndianicWorld : +1 Its all about the communication. In this case it sounds like the FA may have been less than professional in their delivery of the message. Quite f
100 StickShaker : It might be their plane but if they are operating within Australia's borders they are legally obliged to respect Australian law including anti-discri
101 OzarkD9S : If I paid for a specific seat and was charged extra for it, yes it does, which is why I used the term "somewhat". If I paid for F, and was asked to m
102 Post contains images readytotaxi : Now that IS a balanced point of view, well said.
103 Peoro : I'am a man and in my thirties, back in 2009/10 I flow from Lisbon to Gatwick with TP, the cabin crew seated next to me two UM girls around 11 years of
104 ckfred : Yet, if a small child needs to be patted down by TSA, they still follow the protocol that female screeners pat down girls and male screeners pat down
105 mariner : I'm sympathetic to the airlines desire to avoid a problem, but I think it is sad that it has come to this. As a boy, my only unpleasant flying experie
106 pegasus1 : BAstew. The policy has indeed been amended. As it is an internal policy, I will not reprint it here, but it is as Speedbird2155 states and dates back
107 blueflyer : Unless they're teachers in a US high school (what? sleazy stereotypes are not allowed?)
108 Dizzy777 : Yes, but Australia has a whole raft of laws for one and not the other.. For instance - to open a "women only" gym is perfectly legal and is is no way
109 DIRECTFLT : So, the airline can directt UM minors to sit together with no risk. But isn't it possible that a minor could do harm to another minor? Say, a 15 yr ol
110 aa757first : I'm uncomfortable with this policy. After all, it assumes I'm going to somehow disturb a child because I'm a man. Nothing could be further from the tr
111 Post contains images keegd76 : A 4-yr-old travelling as a UM Seriously???
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Unaccompanied Minor Gets Sent To Wrong Destination posted Tue Jun 16 2009 06:33:35 by BWI757
Air France Comes Under Fire Again posted Fri May 29 2009 02:05:25 by Rajrs
Virgin Atlantic--Serious Issues (caused Fire) With Wiring posted Fri Feb 13 2009 08:59:51 by Gwyire
SAA CEO Under Fire Again posted Mon Feb 2 2009 02:25:39 by Andz
Virgin's Weird Pricing Policy posted Tue Nov 11 2008 01:36:30 by Ansett767
QF Bosses Under Fire For Alleged Safety Cover-up posted Fri Sep 19 2008 20:50:43 by 777ER
Qantas Under Fire Again posted Sun Aug 3 2008 01:29:04 by Jokestar
Unaccompanied Minor Drama posted Fri Aug 31 2007 05:14:42 by Jetblue32
Virgin Eyes Europe-U.S. Flights Under "open Skies" posted Sun Mar 18 2007 06:20:36 by TACAA320
GE Jet Engines Under Fire posted Tue Aug 29 2006 13:41:53 by Leelaw